WASHINGTON (AP) — The U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration is moving to reclassify marijuana as a less dangerous drug. The Justice Department’s proposal would allow medical uses for marijuana, but would not legalize recreational use.
The proposal would move marijuana from the “Schedule I” group to the less regulated “Schedule III.”
So what does that mean and what are the implications?
What has actually changed? What happens next?
Technically nothing yet. The proposal must be reviewed by the White House Office of Management and Budget, followed by a public comment period and review by an administrative judge, a potentially lengthy process.
Still, the switch is considered a “paradigm shift and very exciting,” said Vince Slewowski, a Portland, Oregon-based attorney who runs a popular legal blog on cannabis and psychedelic topics. told the Associated Press. The Ministry of Health and Welfare recommended changes.
“I cannot overstate how big news this is,” he said.
This comes after President Joe Biden last year asked both HHS and the attorney general, who oversees the DEA, to review how marijuana is classified. Legally, we consider it to be the equivalent of heroin, LSD, quaaludes, and ecstasy.
White House press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre said Thursday that Democrat Biden supports legalizing the use of medical marijuana “when appropriate and consistent with medical and scientific evidence.” Stated. “That’s why it’s important that we pass this independent review.”
If marijuana is reclassified, will recreational cannabis be legalized nationwide?
no. Schedule III drugs, including ketamine, anabolic steroids, and some combinations of acetaminophen and codeine, remain controlled substances.
They are subject to various rules that permit some medical uses, and those who traffic the drugs without a permit face federal criminal prosecution.
No changes are expected to the medical marijuana programs currently licensed in 38 states or the recreational marijuana market, which is legal in 23 states, but federal manufacturing, record-keeping, prescribing, and other requirements for Schedule III drugs are not expected to change. It is unlikely that this will be met.
In recent years, even under marijuana’s current Schedule I status, there have not been many federal prosecutions for simply possessing marijuana, but the reclassification would not have an immediate impact on people already in the criminal justice system. right.
“Simply put, this move from Schedule I to Schedule III is not going to get people out of prison,” said David Culver, senior vice president of public affairs for the American Cannabis Council.
However, the schedule change itself would have some impact on research taxes and marijuana business taxes, among other things.
What does this mean for research?
Because marijuana is included in Schedule I, it has been extremely difficult to conduct approved clinical studies that involve administering the drug. This creates a catch-22 problem where more research is needed but there are barriers to implementing it. (Scientists also rely on people’s own reports of marijuana use.)
Culver said Schedule III drugs are easier to study, but reclassification won’t immediately overturn all research barriers.
What about taxes (and banks)?
Under federal tax law, businesses involved in the “trafficking” of marijuana and other Schedule I or II drugs cannot deduct rent, payroll, and various other expenses that other businesses can deduct. (Yes, at least some cannabis businesses, especially state-licensed ones, pay taxes to the federal government even though marijuana is prohibited.) Industry groups say the tax rate will end up being more than 70% It is said that this is often the case.
This deduction rule does not apply to Schedule III drugs, so the proposed changes would significantly reduce taxes for cannabis companies.
They argue it will be treated like other industries and help them compete with illegal competitors that have frustrated licensees and officials in New York and elsewhere.
“It strengthens these state programs,” said Adam Goers, an executive with Columbia Care, a large medical and recreational cannabis company. He is co-chairing a coalition of businesses and other stakeholders pushing for the schedule change.
Bo Kilmer, co-director of the RAND Drug Policy Center, said if these costs were deducted, it could also lead to more marijuana promotion and advertising.
The schedule change does not directly affect other marijuana business issues. That’s because federally regulated agencies are wary of marijuana’s legal status, making it difficult to access banks, especially when it comes to financing. The industry is instead looking to a measure called the SAFE Banking Act. He passed the House multiple times but stalled in the Senate.
Are there any critics? what do they say?
In fact, there are even national anti-legalization groups such as “Smart Approaches to Marijuana.” President Kevin Sabet, a former Obama administration drug policy official, said the HHS recommendation was “anti-science and reeks of politics” and that the industry is “desperately seeking legitimacy.” He said he regrets that.
Some legalization supporters argue that rescheduling marijuana is too gradual. They want to keep the focus on completely removing it from the list of controlled substances, which does not include items like alcohol and tobacco (which are regulated, but it’s not the same).
Paul Armentano, deputy director of the National Marijuana Law Reform Organization, said simply reclassifying marijuana would “perpetuate the gap that exists between state and federal marijuana policy.” Carrico Castille, president of the Minority Cannabis Business Association, said that rather than granting blanket permits to state license holders and finalizing nearly decades of arrests that have disproportionately drawn in people of color, He said he would only reschedule the ban.
“Schedule III is going to be left in this amorphous, muddy middle ground, and people will never understand the danger of it still being federally illegal,” he said.
___ Peltz reported from New York. Associated Press writer Colleen Long in Washington contributed to this report.
